sanctuary

Monday, September 30, 2013

You can sequence genes on a
computer, email them to a lab and a week later, for $100, receive a
vial of DNA.

(Ellen Jorgensen, molecular
biologist)

The approaching brick wall

Paleogenomics is a relatively new
field, whereby small bits of DNA can be extracted from small
fragments of bones, providing additional data about the history of
human evolution. The Neanderthal genome was generated from 3 small
bones and later a toe bone. But, to digress for a moment.

Three stories appeared recently
about the “human condition,” that reminded me that the last
divergent branch of the evolutionary “bush” was likely
Neanderthal. While evolution itself is slow, what is different today
is that for the first time in human history evolutionary change has
the potential to move much faster because of the extraordinary
discoveries in genetics.

This of course is hardly a reason
to be uncritically optimistic about the future of our species. These
stories, however, also raise the question about nature and nurture
and the role that both environment and genes play in “who we are.”

The first story is about a National
Rifle Association (NRA) lobbyist and the killing of an elephant in
Botswana. What this particular individual did was not illegal—but
will be in 2014. In fact, as the human population increases and we
more and more encroach on animal habitats, it is the animal that
invariably loses. Authorized “hunts” serve to reduce animal
populations and provide funding (hunting fees) to support wildlife
reserves, at least this is part of the rationale offered for the
killings.

This particular story generated a
fair amount of criticism directed at the hunter. In response, this
N.R.A. lobbyist called his critics “animal Nazis” and claimed
that he was a “hunter” and hunters kill animals. No, he's not a
hunter, just someone with a high-powered rifle with too much time on
his hands. See the video below and read NRA lobbyist shoots elephantin the face and then celebrates with champagne.

These stories could be replicated
across the globe, yet they offer some examples, it seems to me, of a
particular sub-species of humankind, an anachronism perhaps, a
“throwback” to our past that began over a million years ago. How
in fact do we go about increasing such qualities as generosity, trust
and empathy in our species. How do we go about “repairing” a
poorly functioning cingulate cortex, that part of our brain essential
for self-awareness?

The story of the gun lobbyist
killing the elephant is largely a story about that minority of
privileged human across the globe with an overdeveloped sense of
entitlement and obtuseness ... yet, what environmental factors, if
any, create the mentality of these primitive death eaters? The other
two stories speak for themselves.

Our Neanderthal connection

What is significant about
sequencing the Neanderthal genome is that the Neanderthal died out
only some 25,000 years ago; we're not trying to find comparisons that
go back millions of years. Approximately 2.5 percent of our DNA,
outside of Africa, came from Neanderthal. Our two species most
probably met between 65,000 and 95,000 years ago. After that there
was no more interbreeding.

Scientist do not know for certain
what caused the extinction of Neanderthal but a “popular”
hypothesis is that humans out-competed them because of more advanced
language skills. We know that the FOXP2 gene, the instinct for speech
and grammar, is identical in Neanderthal, but genes in cognitive
development are different in humans and Neanderthal,quite possibly
to have solved different sets of problems, anticipating prey for
example.

Will a certain percentage of humans
go extinct or will we manage to destroy our species completely,
ideally without bringing misery to all life on the planet?

Friday, September 20, 2013

The conditions that sustain
humanity are not natural and never have been.

(Erle C. Ellis, associate professor
of geography and environmental systems, University of Maryland)

An Anthropocentric world

Professor Ellis, quoted above,
appears to be an outspoken optimist regarding humanity's future.
Earth's environment is going to be pretty much what Homo sapiens
decide to do with it. Ellis' point is that from the very beginnings
of human existence, we have “used,” various technologies and
engineered ecosystems to sustain ourselves well beyond what the
“natural” world could have done.

According to Professor Ellis, Earth's
carrying capacity, at best, is probably no more than a few billion
people living at a subsistence level. Today of course we're on our
way to reach some 9 billion by 2050. Stewart Brand, editor of the
Whole Earth Catalog and founder of several environmental related
organization, said some forty years ago that, “We are as gods and
might as well get good at it.” Hm-m. So is this what being a god is
like? See Ellis' article in the NYT entitled Overpopulation Is Notthe Problem.

The limbic brain and Genopolitics

Professor Ellis at the end of his
article in the New York Times states that only our imaginationsand
our social systems will prevent us from reaching that “proud”
future. Imaginations and social systems, however, might be large
caveats.

Possibly some of the most fascinating
work in science today is being done in biology, specifically in
neuroscience, epigenetics (how genes are both agents of nature and
nurture) and synthetic biology, which utilizes engineering principles
to life science. In simple terms it means breaking down nature into
spare parts so we can rebuild it however we please. We will likely
have to make some very serious choices in the not too distant future,
choices that will impact our “imaginations and social systems.”

Neuroscience has come up with five
classes of personality traits: (1) openness, (2) conscientiousness,
(3) extroversion, (4) agreeableness and (5) neuroticism. About 50
percent of these traits are genetic and about fifty percent, on
average, are environmental. Interestingly, when we're young,
environment tends to have a greater impact on how we behave, but as
we get older and more independent our genes play a larger role.

The response to threats is a
structure in our limbic brain called the amygdala. The amygdala is
what causes those all too familiar feelings of unease most of us get
at one time or another. The amygdala is connected to the cingulate
cortex, an area absolutely critical to self-awareness. While, for
example, the amygdala may be perceiving something as a threat, the
cingulate cortex analyzes the amygdala's response and decides if it's a
real threat or not.

Needless to say it begins to get
complicated when we start talking about neurotransmitters, serotonin
and dopamine being two, and the connection to the cingulate cortex,
but suffice it to say that the release of hormones like oxytocin,
cortisol or testosterone—and their levels—affect behavior and how
we react to a great many thing. This has led to a relatively new
field called Genopolitics.

Neurobiologists have discovered that
the amygdala acts in different ways in liberals and conservatives.
Yes, it appears that political views have a genetic component.
Research has shown that people with larger emotional responses to
threats are more likely to have more conservative opinions. Brain
scans have shown that when stressed the cortex and the amygdala light
up differently and depending on a number of factors, the connection
between these two areas may be strong or weak. For example, oxytocin,
the “cuddle hormone,” which is released in sex and organism, is
thought to be the hormone smothering the amygdala, thus increasing
generosity, trust, etc. Conversely, when the amygdala response is
lowered, a threat from real danger may not be perceived.

The brave new world

Yes, it is possible we may be able to
imagine a totally new future along with the development of improved
social systems. On the other hand we humans could discover we are as
“godlike” as the rock at our feet.

Geo-engineering might be able to
reverse the negative effects of climate change. The assumption here
of course is that the majority of the inhabitants on the planet will
have a basic understanding what climate change is. It's also possible
that synthetic biology will eliminate human shortsightedness and
predation. Possibly the growing middle class in China will come to
realize that bringing the elephant to extinction because they must
have the “bling” of ivory is not the action of a “higher”
species.

Some demographers believe that the
planet could maintain a population of 13 billion humans. Of course,
significant changes would have to be made. Who's willing to never eat
meat again? How high could we build our vertical structures?

A short while ago I saw a photograph
of four hunters from somewhere in the southern United States. They
were standing proudly beside a dead crocodile suspended in the air by
chains, said to be one of the largest ever killed. The picture
elicited in me revulsion and disgust … directed at the four humans.
For what reason was this animal killed? For the briefest of moments I
imagined myself standing beside four hunters suspended on meat hooks.
I must raise my serotonin levels in order to meet the future with
optimism.

Google+ Followers

About Me

"We reached the old wolf in time to watch a fierce green fire dying in her eyes. I realized then, and have known ever since, that there was something new to me in those eyes--something known only to her and to the mountains." (Aldo Leopold, "Thinking Like a Mountain")
"We are the rich. We own America. We got it, God knows how, but we intend to keep it." (Frederick Townsend Martin, 19th century plutocrat)